Explore the vast range of titles available.

This article proposes a novel conceptualization of knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship, which can capture the main characteristics of a vital phenomenon in the modern economy. Our conceptualization is based upon the integration of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems approach. It consists of a theoretical definition and a stylized process model. According to this view, knowledgeintensive innovative entrepreneurs are involved in the creation, diffusion, and use of knowledge; introduce new products and technologies; draw resources and ideas from their innovation system; and introduce change and dynamism into the economy. In the article, we also offer an empirical definition of knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship, which we then use to identify its key characteristics and relevance. We conclude with recommendations for a future research agenda.

Previous work on institutional complexity has discussed two solutions that organizations internally deploy when externally engaging with multiple institutional logics: blended hybrids, in which logics are combined throughout the organization, and structural hybrids, in which different logics dominate in different compartments within the organization. While blended hybrids have been extensively investigated, few studies have examined how structural hybrids are constructed and maintained. We address this imbalance by studying university–industry research centers as instances of distinct organizational spaces used to engage with a minority logic. We found that these spaces require three kinds of work: (a) leveraging, where dominant logic practices are drawn on to achieve minority logic objectives; (b) hybridizing, where the practices inside the space are modified to allow engagement with the minority logic; and (c) bolstering, where the space is shielded against excessive minority logic influence and anchored back into the organization. Furthermore, contrary to the existing literature, we found that the spaces were hybrid, rather than being dominated by a single logic. Our finding is likely generalizable across many instances of structural hybrids given the integration problems that organizations with pure single logic spaces would face, combined with the usefulness of hybrid spaces. Our study is novel in revealing the work needed to sustain hybrid spaces and questioning the previously held conceptualization of structural hybrids as made up of single-logic compartments. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2018.1228 .

This article conceptualizes innovation as a process, where the scientific and industrial application of technological knowledge nurtures new routines and institutions, in order to relate changing business model innovations to innovation cascades. Innovation in science-based, high-tech sectors is changing its tempo, from the evolutionary pace of incremental novelties punctuated by occasional radical novelties, to innovation cascades. These cascades involve a long series of interlinked radical innovations, which can be traced through various scientific and technological indicators like patents and publications. Innovation cascades are relevant to industry, because they make the future less predictable. They are particularly interesting because these changes also enable the testing an abundance of new business models. Innovation cascades have a major impact on the number and sustainability of business models and on strategy. Business model innovations are visible not only in the existing organizations that undergo change, but also new organizational models appear. The case of biotechnology after the 1980s is used to illustrate our conceptualization.

The main contribution of this paper is a theory-based conceptual framework of innovation spaces, and how firms must navigate through them to innovate. The concept of innovation systems - at the regional, sectoral and national levels - have been highly influential. Previous literature developing the concept of innovation systems has stressed the importance of institutions, networks and knowledge bases at the regional, sectoral and national levels. This paper primarily draws upon an evolutionary and Schumpeterian economics perspective, in the following three senses. The conceptualization of 'innnovation spaces' focuses upon how and why firm search for innovations is influenced the opportunities within certain geographical contexts. This means that the firm create opportunities and can span different context, but they are influence by the context in term of the access, flow and co-evolution of ideas, resources, technology, people and knowledge, which help stimulate business innovation in terms of products, process and services. The paper concludes with an agenda for future research and especially the need to focus on globalization as a process of intensifying linkages across the globe.

What is the role of knowledge in stimulating entrepreneurship and regional transformation? This is an intriguing and fundamental question in social science. Answering it would enable us to understand how and why the acts of developing, using and diffusing different forms of knowledge help stimulate economic growth and societal well-being. Finding an unequivocal answer to such a multifaceted question cannot be tackled in one set of articles. Instead, our aim is more limited in further developing a set of theories, related to the Schumpeterian and evolutionary perspective on the relationships between knowledge, entrepreneurship, and regional transformation. More specifically, we position this special section to contribute to the theorizing and growing stock of empirical evidence within the research community fascinated with developing a Schumpeterian and evolutionary perspective on entrepreneurship, small business economics, and regional economic change. The aim of this special section is to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of how different expressions of knowledge—such as science, routines, technology, education, design, and skills—are used in ways which transform business activities, firms, and regional economies. This special section advances our understanding by providing more nuanced view on the distinctive role of knowledge in relation to both entrepreneurship and regional economic transformation separately, as well as the two together.

This article contributes with an analysis of the specific linkages between knowledge, innovation and entrepreneurship for industrial dynamics, within the emerging literature upon knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurial (KIE) firms. We find a distinct variety in the usefulness of different types of founder experience (single or teams) in the performance of entrepreneurial firms. This variety affects selection in the economy, as measured by the performance of firms in a two-stage process – namely first by analyzing survival over time and then of high growth rates. We do so in order to consider averages/probabilities in the population using Cox regression as well as of the outliers, using quantile regression. We find that on one hand, founders having previously started firms or worked in the same industry are more likely to survive. On the other hand, very high-growth firms have founders who previously started firms or worked in universities. Combining different types of founder experience in KIE firms has a consistently positive relationship with performance both in terms of survival and of growth. Our interpretation is that the variety of founder experience affect selection processes and opportunity recognition in KIE firms and thereby fundamentally affect whether, and to what extent, entrepreneurial actions lead to industrial transformation.

The two main purposes of this article are: 1) To propose a conceptual model for governance at the interface of science and technology with knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship and 2) To develop propositions and propose a future research agenda on evolutionary governance routines. Our proposed conceptualization of governance depends upon an understanding of how different ways of developing rules and norms to interact and make decisions collectively are created and maintained, including two sub-processes. One process is to develop advanced knowledge and the second process is where entrepreneurs transform that knowledge developed as the public good and privatize it through value creation. We propose that a main task for this type of entrepreneur is to manage their engagement in the overall governance in such a way as to be perceived by others as continuing to contribute to the collective action problem. The article provides definitions and propositions in relation to the conceptualization, as well as interesting trajectories for future research.

The university plays a particular set of roles in the global knowledge economy. It acts as a provider of both public and private goods in terms of education and research, as well as playing historically well-established roles in terms of applied problem solving. Also, through what has been called its public space role, the university acts as a conduit for the development of wider societal impacts linked to and coevolving with the other three roles, and facilitating integration into the wider social and innovation system (Lester and Piore, 2004; Hughes and Kitson, 2012, this issue). Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press

From an evolutionary economics perspective, knowledge networks are self-organizing systems. Therefore, studying changes of these systems requires an understanding of how such changes are influenced by both the behaviors and characteristics of key individual actors and the network structure. We apply this perspective to a network of investigators (i.e. lead scientists) and a sample of 9543 Phase 2 cancer clinical trials during the period 2002–2012, in order to examine the structure and explore the dynamics of the clinical trial network. Using temporal exponential random graph models, we examine whether preferential attachment, multi-connectivity, or homophily drive the formation of new collaborative relations to knowledge translators - i.e. investigators with basic and clinical research knowledge. Our results suggest that despite some increased connectivity over time the network remains fragmented due to the considerably growing number of investigators in the network. This fragmentation limits opportunities for knowledge transfer to advance clinical trials. We find that homophily in research fields and investigators’ country of affiliation and heterophily in terms of publication output promote the formation of ties to knowledge translators. We find also that multi-connectivity increases the probability of tie formation with knowledge translators while preferential attachment reduces this probability.

Smart specialization strategies represent public policy initiatives to develop regions based on new combinations of knowledge and industries. The aim of this article is to enrich the theory and practice of smart specialization strategies (S3) by integrating the conceptualization of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship (KIE). We propose that knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship is necessary in order to specify how public and private support of KIE firms can be beneficial to develop new knowledge relevant to the fulfillment of specific sustainable development goals. We did so by further developing a conceptual model of innovation governance routines by integrating sustainability goals. We also illustrated our conceptual model through two case studies from the Swedish maritime cluster. By extrapolating from the combination of the conceptual model and two case studies, we make three propositions about the different strategic roles that KIE firms can play within a broader S3 policy setting, and in such a way as to promote sustainability-related outcomes.